Delegates met throughout the day to
discuss water and sanitation issues. On water, discussions focused on:
providing access to safe drinking water; preparing IWRM plans and
creating an institutional framework for IWRM; enhancing water use
efficiency and managing competing uses; and addressing water quality,
ecosystem management and disaster prevention. On sanitation, delegates
addressed issues concerning: providing access to adequate sanitation;
and managing wastewater and strengthening monitoring systems. In the
afternoon, an expert panel introduced policy options and possible
actions for addressing human settlements, following which participants
engaged in a discussion session.

PARALLEL SESSIONS

WATER:
This session was chaired by CSD-13 Vice-Chair Khaled Elbakly (Egypt).
Many delegates welcomed the Secretary-General’s report on water,
emphasized holistic approaches that integrate water and sanitation, and
underscored the importance of women’s and civil society participation in
planning and implementation. Many developing countries underscored the
need for means of implementation, urging, inter alia, capacity
development to enhance and ensure institutional and regulatory
capacities, appropriate technology transfer, and increased financing and
development assistance. Madagascar, for the AFRICAN GROUP, urged support
for South-South cooperation and the sharing of best practices. Many
delegates underscored the importance of decentralization. The EU,
MAURITANIA, UKand
VENEZUELA said local initiatives should be housed within a national
framework, and SOUTH AFRICA said water should be considered a national
asset.

Many delegations underscored the role of
regional organizations and partnerships, as well as the importance of
institutional frameworks, in water management and transboundary
cooperation. Delegates discussed and called for the support of
cooperative initiatives, including the Nile River Basin initiative and
an Italian initiative, in collaboration with UNEP-GPA and UNESCO, to
increase cooperation in meeting rural water needs. Delegations also
highlighted the role of a number of relevant UN programmes, including
the UNEP-GPA and UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme.

CANADA and FINLAND stressed the need for
an intergovernmental home for water and sanitation issues, and NGOs
called for a multilateral institutional focal point for tracking and
monitoring IWRM plans. Several countries called for strengthening water
monitoring programmes. Underscoring the importance of data collection,
monitoring and reporting, FRANCE outlined options to address these
issues at the national, regional and global levels.

avoid imposing
conditions on international assistance regarding private sector
involvement or the use of unsustainable technologies (Tanzania,
Venezuela, NGOs);

create subsidies
that are well-targeted and transparent (India);

create and use
credit schemes, including self-renewing credit and microcredit, as
well as consider structural adjustment of tariff systems (EU);

develop deep
water aquifers (Japan, Azerbaijan);

harvest rainwater
as an alternative source (Tanzania);

develop shallow
groundwater resources (Burkina Faso);

provide support
for desalination (Egypt); and

consider the
environment and production sector as users in rights-based
approaches (South Africa).

On IWRM, many delegations emphasized an
ecosystems approach, with SWITZERLAND, supported by the EU and others,
underscoring the role of ecosystems in protecting and providing water
resources for multiple uses. INDIA, INDONESIA and NORWAY urged tailoring
IWRM approaches to country circumstances. EGYPT stressed the need to
reconsider the definition of IWRM to ensure it is not “stretched too
thin.” Delegates also discussed policy options, such as:

integrating IWRM
plans into NSSDs and PRSPs (Switzerland);

increasing
payment for environmental services (Costa Rica);

developing water
safety plans that take into account health considerations (US);

ensuring that
national MEA focal points are involved in drafting and implementing
IWRM plans (Switzerland); and

designating a UN
agency to support IWRM at the country level (Sierra Leone).

On
enhancing water use efficiency and managing competing uses, delegates
discussed:

the role of
water-related ecosystems for reducing disaster risk (Switzerland);

the vulnerability
of the poorest countries (Finland);

the results of
the Kobe-Hyogo World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) (Japan,
Switzerland);

the need for an
international center for water hazards and risk management (Japan);
and

an
appeal tabled at the WCDR to halve the loss of human life caused by
major water disasters by 2015 (Japan).

SANITATION:
This session was chaired by CSD-13 Vice-Chair Dagmara Berbalk (Germany).
Discussion focused on policy options and practical measures, including
decentralized approaches, the role of stakeholders, health and
education, and financing. Many delegates welcomed the
Secretary-General’s report on sanitation and stressed the importance of
its focus on the integrated approach to water and sanitation. Delegates
also underscored: the role of women in decision-making, implementation
and capacity-building activities; the importance of involving
communities and NGOs in implementation; decentralizing implementation
and strengthening local government capacities and funding; and the
“case” for investing in sanitation. Many delegations also shared their
national experiences in providing sanitation services.

use the World
Bank’s public expenditure tracking system, as well as
community-based performance monitoring schemes (NGOs).

PLENARY

EXPERTS PANEL: Human settlements:
This session was chaired by Vice-Chair Shin (Republic of Korea).
Presenting key lessons from the second World Urban Forum, Marï¿½a Antonia
Trujillo, Spainï¿½s Minister of Housing, highlighted the importance of:
land registration and titling; local materials and contractors; womenï¿½s
legal access to land and inheritance; and training people in situ.

Elliot Sclar, Co-coordinator of the
Millennium Project Task Force on Improving the Lives of Slum Dwellers,
underlined the interlinkages and mutual dependence of policy development
and good governance. He stressed the need to move from creating lists of
options to making attainable and transformative choices.

Silvia Andere, Public Administrator of the
Municipal Urbanization Corporation of Belo Horizonte, Brazil, reviewed
experiences in developing, implementing and evaluating public policies
for improving housing in the cityï¿½s ï¿½favelas.ï¿½ Highlighting lessons
learned, she underscored the need to: involve local residents in every
stage and aspect of the process; minimize displacement, and when this is
not possible, provide choices of new locations; and integrate residents
with the local economy and society.

Sylvia Martinez, Senior Advisor of the US
Federal Housing Finance Board, shared options for finance strategies
aimed at the poor. She emphasized the importance of good legal
underpinnings for ownership, acquisition and limited eminent domain. She
said different systems of ownership can be accommodated, and that tax
incentives can stimulate local capital formation, investment and the
development of competitive private banking institutions.

Discussion:
In the ensuing discussion, participants addressed issues dealing with
evicted populations (Azerbaijan) and controlling land speculation
(Bolivia). Australia presented an idea for an internet-based mechanism
for sharing lessons on policy integration.

IN THE CORRIDORS

During Tuesdayï¿½s discussions on policy
options and possible actions for water and sanitation, some delegates
were overwhelmed with a sense of dï¿½jï¿½ vu, with many noting that
the debates closely resembled the CSD-12 review session. This dï¿½jï¿½ vu
led some to question the value of the IPM and the rationale for engaging
in general debate instead of fast-tracking negotiations. Some were also
speculating whether the current levels of debate would lead to the
expected Chairï¿½s text being used as the basis of negotiations for the
main session in April. Despite this uncertainty, the general debate has
created the informal space for several delegations to begin circulating
position papers and non-papers outlining their ideas for implementation
frameworks, policy options and visions of the outcome of the first
policy session. In the words of one seasoned CSD negotiator, the
proliferation of informally-circulated text may indeed be providing the
perfect incubation space for the manifestation of a substantial outcome
of the IPM by Friday.

This issue of
the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin ï¿½ <enb@iisd.org>
is written and edited by
Twig Johnson, Ph.D., Amber
Moreen, Miquel Muï¿½oz, Prisna
Nuengsigkapian, and Richard
Sherman. The Digital Editor
is Dan Birchall. The Editor
is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <pam@iisd.org>
and the Director of IISD
Reporting Services is
Langston James ï¿½Kimoï¿½ Goree
VI <kimo@iisd.org>.
The Sustaining Donors of the
Bulletin are the
Government of the United
States of America (through
the Department of State
Bureau of Oceans and
International Environmental
and Scientific Affairs), the
Government of Canada
(through CIDA), the Swiss
Agency for Environment,
Forests and Landscape (SAEFL),
the United Kingdom (through
the Department for
International Development -
DFID), the Danish Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, the
Government of Germany
(through the German Federal
Ministry of Environment -
BMU, and the German Federal
Ministry of Development
Cooperation - BMZ), the
Netherlands Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and the
European Commission (DG-ENV).
General Support for the
Bulletin during 2005 is
provided by the United
Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), the
Government of Australia, the
Austrian Federal Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry,
Environment and Water
Management, the Ministry of
Sustainable Development and
the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Sweden, the
Ministry of Environment and
the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Norway, the
Ministry of Environment and
the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Finland, Swan
International, the Japanese
Ministry of Environment
(through the Institute for
Global Environmental
Strategies - IGES) and the
Japanese Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry
(through the Global
Industrial and Social
Progress Research Institute
- GISPRI). Funding for
translation of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin
into French has been
provided by the
International Organization
of the Francophonie (IOF)
and the French Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. Funding for
the
translation of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin
into Spanish has been
provided by the Ministry of
Environment of Spain. The
opinions expressed in the
Earth Negotiations Bulletin
are those of the authors
and do not necessarily
reflect the views of IISD or
other donors. Excerpts from
the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin may be used in
non-commercial publications
with appropriate academic
citation. For information on
the Bulletin,
including requests to
provide reporting services,
contact the Director of IISD
Reporting Services at <kimo@iisd.org>,
+1-646-536-7556 or 212 East
47th St. #21F, New York, NY
10017, USA. The ENB Team at
CSD-13 IPM can be contacted
by e-mail at <prisna@iisd.org>.